Did you participate in an election pool and lose because you
picked Rob McKenna over Jay Inslee? Did you think Linda Simpson
would carry her primary momentum into the general election and
defeat Charlotte Garrido in the county commissioner’s race? Did you
buy into Karl Rove’s “math you do as a Republican to make
yourself feel better” and think all the polls predicting an Obama
victory were slanted?

Or was it something else? Was the margin of victory for gay
marriage proponents slimmer than you thought it would be? Did
Washington voters allowing for charter schools surprise you?

Walt Washington, county auditor, issued a statement saying
ballots will begin arriving Oct. 19 and that this year’s ballot
will require two first-class stamps should you choose to mail it
back. Or you can weigh it to get the exact postage. The bottom line
is one stamp won’t be enough.

An alternative to mailing is to drop the ballot at one of six
drop boxes throughout the county. The drop boxes are at the
following sites:

The Poulsbo Fire Station

The Bainbridge Island Fire Station

The upper parking lot at the Norm Dicks Government Center in
Bremerton

The County Administration Building in Port Orchard

The Central Kitsap School District Administration Building in
Silverdale

The Sylvan Way Kitsap Regional Library branch building in East
Bremerton

Washington also offers information about licensing, housing and
shelter programs and financial reporting.

The Seattle Times editorial board was critical of several
would-be members of Congress who decided to run both for the
temporary seat and the permanent one. I wish the issue were that
easy to describe for us in Kitsap, but let’s save that conversation
for later in this blog post.

The Times’ criticism points out that candidates like Darcy
Burner, who was the first to declare she’d run in both races, get
to raise twice as much money this way for mailers and the like,
because she can raise money for two different elections. (Confused
already? I don’t blame you. I’ll explain it all later. I keep
promising that, I know.) I mention Burner specifically, because
she’s the one who started the cascade of candidates running for the
full two-year term that begins in January to also run for the
one-month job (It might be longer. I know, that’s confusing.) That
ends in January to fill the last month of Jay Inslee’s
congressional term. He resigned earlier this year to focus on his
bid for the governor’s office. Burner was joined in running for
both seats by Democrats Suzan DelBene, Laura Ruderman and Darshan
Rauniyar. Republican John Koster joined in as well. Democrat Steve
Hobbs declined, saying the move by the other candidates was
motivated by money. The Times editorial didn’t mention that
independent candidate Larry Ishmael also declined.

The Times may be off the mark in question the point of a
one-month congressional job. There could be some important items to
vote on, such as the budget, the extension of the Bush tax cuts and
an income tax deduction for Washington residents.

But I think the Times may also have a case in suggesting
candidates will raise money for both races, but do you think anyone
Kitsap County will see any mailers from candidates for the
one-month job? The Times opines that all the benefit of the extra
money will go toward winning the permanent seat.

So let’s again explain why this is happening.

First off, Jay Inslee resigned from Congress, and congressional
officials said federal law stipulates that an election to replace
him during his term must happen. If he had resigned with a month
left that wouldn’t have been necessary, but he is out of the seat
for long enough that congressional officials believe it merits
electing a replacement.

Had this not been a redistricting year the state would have had
the option of taking the winner of the general election and
appointing him or her to the seat early. Because it’s a
redistricting year and the 1st District boundaries have been
changed dramatically, whoever gets elected in the 1st will be
representing a vastly different area than the current 1st. So
voters in Bainbridge would be represented for one month by someone
they had no say in choosing.

So on the primary and general election ballot voters in about
half of Kitsap County, the part currently in the 1st Congressional
District, will pick a member to fill the remainder of Inslee’s term
from about early December to early January and a congressman in the
6th Congressional District, with that term beginning in early
January.

In the final candidate filing story last week I tried to
simplify the discussion by writing this:

“Candidates for the new 1st Congressional District, which does
not include any portion of Kitsap County, had all held back on
running for the temporary seat, which carries the northern portion
of the county and Bainbridge Island.”

I received an email from someone confused by that paragraph. A
different person used the story comments to express befuddlement. I
admit that there are times I can write things clearer than I do,
but in this case I think the issue is confusing and difficult to
boil down in a single sentence. I think I did pretty well, and it’s
still confusing.

So let me try this.

If you live in the 6th Congressional District now, you have
nothing to figure out.
If you live in the 1st Congressional District in Kitsap County, you
will be electing two members of Congress this year. One will be in
the 6th Congressional District, because beginning in January you
will no longer be in the 1st. You will be in the 6th. That member
of Congress will serve a regular term. The other member of Congress
you elect will be in the 1st District and will only serve for the
last month you will live in the 1st District.

The First congressional will have an election at the end of this
year and it will be in the old boundaries. That means residents who
live in the current first district (me and about half the county)
will vote for a member of congress in two different districts.

The first will be the one to temporarily replace Jay Inslee, who
resigned as congressman to run full time for governor. The other
will be to vote for the replacement for Norm Dicks, who retires at
the end of this term.

So if you’ve ever wanted to be a member of Congress, but two
years is just too dang long, this could be your chance to fill in
temporarily, get a decent little salary, free mail and a travel
allowance.

The race for state legislative House District 26, Position 2,
helped provide context for an L.A. Times story that highlights a
trend from this election. First, here’s the entire selection
dedicated to the Larry Seaquist-Doug Richards race:

In Washington, State Rep. Larry Seaquist hasn’t focused on a
foreclosure suffered by his homebuilder opponent.

“I frankly don’t think there’s a lot of mileage to be gained in
that,” Seaquist said Thursday.

The story generally focuses on how a
candidate’s financial struggles are not necessarily hurting them in
the 2010 election. In fact, in some cases it is a sign that the
candidate can relate. Again from the story:

In some cases, adversaries point to these problems as examples
of poor judgment and highlight perceived ethical lapses. But
experts say they would be wise to tread carefully in a time of
widespread pain, because voter sympathy may weigh into election day
decisions.

First off, homebuilder is not Richards’ day job, but let’s not
quibble. In July Chris Henry wrote the story about Richards
facing foreclosure on an
investment property. The comments on the story are interesting and
to some degree do reflect the point of the L.A. Times story.

In the August primary Seaquist and Richards were the only names
on the ballot for the race. Seaquist received 51.6 percent of the
vote to Richards’ 48.4.

Looking further, I checked the numbers from the 2008 election to
see if we could learn anything from it to suggest how things might
go in November. Seaquist actually gained three percentage points in
2008 between the primary and the general election, but you could
dismiss that as the difference between what was going on in August
2008 compared to November 2008. Democrats gained percentage points
in five of the seven legislative races that year. And in the two
races they did not the losses were slight.

Speaking more broadly, the general election played out exactly
as the primary did when it comes to final results in 2008. Six
Democrats and one Republican won. The margins in this year’s
primary were much narrower than they were in 2008, so the six wins
Democrats saw in the eight races are not as safe in terms of
predicting what happens in November. But still, how big a win do
you need?

Fred Finn, first-term incumbent Democrat representative in the
35th District received 46.6 percent against two candidates, one a
Republican (Linda Simpson) and one who identified himself (Glenn
Gaither) as an independent conservative. Democrat Kathy Haigh,
representing the other 35th District House seat, had less than a
percentage point margin over Republican Dan Griffey. In 2008
Haigh’s total went up more than five percentage points between the
primary and the general election and won by 23 percentage
points.

If Republicans hope to turn around the 8-1 margin against them
in the Legislature, it would appear this would be the year. As
mentioned earlier, the margins are closer. On the other hand, there
is no solid evidence to wager your house on any change at all from
the Kitsap delegation. As much ground as Republicans seem to have
made, it may not be enough come November to close the Kitsap
legislative gap. A half-point win results in the same thing as a
20-point margin. The winner goes to Olympia.